exiledjag Posted April 21, 2020 Report Share Posted April 21, 2020 1 hour ago, delurker said: They will maybe get the 14, but none of the rest. Everyone currently in the Prem will use this as an opportunity to pull up the drawbridge, not open it up. Agree. I think though asking for the sky is an opening gambit. I don't think the people who run Livingston are stupid enough to think they can get it all! And as far as the drawbridge is concerned 1 club up and 1 down would I think be what most SPL Clubs would want and only because they know they won't get away with no relegation. If the SPL increases to 14 as a permanent change sometime in the future relegation and promotion should be an automatic 2 down and up (or 1 down and up automatically with the second spot being decided by a play-off 13th in SPL v 2nd in Championship). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlsarmy Posted April 21, 2020 Report Share Posted April 21, 2020 1 hour ago, javeajag said: No football in the Netherlands till September I think the biggest thing for our Football Clubs just now is to actually keep the doors open , think things have changed in the last few days and rather than all the talk about reconstruction, the football authorities should be focusing on a plan to keep our Clubs afloat , if we don’t then I can see a lot of Clubs going out of business. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyprusjag Posted April 21, 2020 Report Share Posted April 21, 2020 Survival is the name of the game. It's almost certain some clubs will go to the wall and we have to make sure we are not one of them. There WILL be league reconstruction not by choice but necessity and the mistakes of the past should not be repeated. So,how do we ensure survival? Do we start trimmimg now? Will the government pay the players and staff wages?Can we get a sustainable loan? Have we assets we can sell? Answers and suggestions on a postcard to PTFC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted April 21, 2020 Report Share Posted April 21, 2020 4 hours ago, javeajag said: Well it’s in multiple sources with date 17 may clearly stated .... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52347927 It’s not in the Danish press Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted April 21, 2020 Report Share Posted April 21, 2020 9 hours ago, jlsarmy said: I would think there would be some tv companies involved and possibly live streaming eg Jagszone etc where you would pay something to stream the games , other than that I’ve no idea how football clubs stay open with very little income coming in . We can barely maintain an audio stream that works for Jagszone, let alone a visual one. If I remember correctly when we came down to Championship it was scrapped due the fact we’d have to buy or hire our own cameras instead of piggybacking of the TV companies ones, and a quantity of over 1000 (I seem to remember) subscribers was needed to justify to the outlay. If a full season was to be behind closed doors then maybe it would be viable, but would any club in the Championship or 1st division lay out substantial cash with a chance the season opens in 3 months. Also what happens to fixtures if one of the team (players, coaches, physio etc) catches this during season. The whole squad and those they played against would either need quarantined (Postponing 4 games) or tested, who pays for the testing or the compensation if a player or official dies through this? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policemans whistle Posted April 21, 2020 Report Share Posted April 21, 2020 10 hours ago, lady-isobel-barnett said: It's a bit "in the knowish" from me but I wouldn't want Hartley anywhere near the Club. That aside, tho' I may not agree with everything the gentleman says, I would imagine he's not exactly expressing opinions too far from a lot of Jags fans. I'll just be happy if we have a club to support when we eventually come out of this whole crisis. I don't know Hartley, but I know many Falkirk fans who do and they all were glad to see the back of him. He cost a fortune to get him, it cost a fortune to get rid of him and it cost a fortune to pay off all the players he signed. I know a few people who know Ian McColl and you should be glad you have got him. Before he came to us, he knew our weaknesses and started the program to get rid of the 'weaknesses' He needs time either as manager or 'upstairs' to get this team back on the right road. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinhead Posted April 21, 2020 Report Share Posted April 21, 2020 I was always for the smaller clubs but from reading Elgin chairman and Forfar Chairman the last few weeks talking about 2 more clubs coming in - Brora and Kelty and how it would dilute their paypot i am now thinking there are far too many clubs in Scottish pro football and we need to cut some adrift. Two leagues of 14 is more than enough with national north/south below them followed by regional leagues. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 11 hours ago, Pinhead said: I was always for the smaller clubs but from reading Elgin chairman and Forfar Chairman the last few weeks talking about 2 more clubs coming in - Brora and Kelty and how it would dilute their paypot i am now thinking there are far too many clubs in Scottish pro football and we need to cut some adrift. Two leagues of 14 is more than enough with national north/south below them followed by regional leagues. More or less in agreement. There's a clear dividing line between full time and part time clubs or more correctly those clubs that have been traditionally full time and those part time over the last few decades. The first two tiers should be of such a size to accommodate all those full time clubs plus a few traditionally part time clubs. 28 clubs seems round about the correct cut off. National/Regional leagues one tier (or perhaps at two tiers) below that. Not dissimilar to the English model if you compare their League One with our premiership. I'm not suggesting for one minute that a full time club can't be relegated to the third tier. Simply they'd have to be the 27th or 28th poorest team that season to end up there. Conversely a handful of well run part time clubs could easily survive in the 2nd tier. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 (edited) 12 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said: More or less in agreement. There's a clear dividing line between full time and part time clubs or more correctly those clubs that have been traditionally full time and those part time over the last few decades. The first two tiers should be of such a size to accommodate all those full time clubs plus a few traditionally part time clubs. 28 clubs seems round about the correct cut off. National/Regional leagues one tier (or perhaps at two tiers) below that. Not dissimilar to the English model if you compare their League One with our premiership. I'm not suggesting for one minute that a full time club can't be relegated to the third tier. Simply they'd have to be the 27th or 28th poorest team that season to end up there. Conversely a handful of well run part time clubs could easily survive in the 2nd tier. It may be a great idea for the benefit of Scottish football, but no way on earth that the current SPFL member clubs would ever vote for this I think that we would need 28 clubs to resign from SPFL and set up a new organisation, similar to when the original SPL was set up many years ago. Edited April 22, 2020 by Dick Dastardly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowenBoys Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 12 hours ago, Pinhead said: I was always for the smaller clubs but from reading Elgin chairman and Forfar Chairman the last few weeks talking about 2 more clubs coming in - Brora and Kelty and how it would dilute their paypot i am now thinking there are far too many clubs in Scottish pro football and we need to cut some adrift. Two leagues of 14 is more than enough with national north/south below them followed by regional leagues. 30 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said: More or less in agreement. There's a clear dividing line between full time and part time clubs or more correctly those clubs that have been traditionally full time and those part time over the last few decades. The first two tiers should be of such a size to accommodate all those full time clubs plus a few traditionally part time clubs. 28 clubs seems round about the correct cut off. National/Regional leagues one tier (or perhaps at two tiers) below that. Not dissimilar to the English model if you compare their League One with our premiership. I'm not suggesting for one minute that a full time club can't be relegated to the third tier. Simply they'd have to be the 27th or 28th poorest team that season to end up there. Conversely a handful of well run part time clubs could easily survive in the 2nd tier. I would go for two leagues of 16. Home and away, 30 games. Cut out the stupid manufactured excitement of the split. No need for mid week games. Plenty of time for cup matches and a wee break at the start of the year. Give clubs a chance. Currently around half the clubs start the season looking over their shoulder, worried about possible relegation. They budget and play accordingly. It's all very negative. Let's have some stability. Let clubs settle and start to grow. Quality will begin to replace quantity. A league tournament for the benefit of the many rather than the two. The argument against is usually 'meaningless games'. I fail to see that any game that your team plays is meaningless and with properly structured prize money, there's always something to play for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 Fewer games overall makes sense to me, BB. Would give the players more time to be coached and practice, probably also reduce injuries during the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Jag Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 35 minutes ago, BowenBoys said: I would go for two leagues of 16. Home and away, 30 games. Cut out the stupid manufactured excitement of the split. No need for mid week games. Plenty of time for cup matches and a wee break at the start of the year. Give clubs a chance. Currently around half the clubs start the season looking over their shoulder, worried about possible relegation. They budget and play accordingly. It's all very negative. Let's have some stability. Let clubs settle and start to grow. Quality will begin to replace quantity. A league tournament for the benefit of the many rather than the two. The argument against is usually 'meaningless games'. I fail to see that any game that your team plays is meaningless and with properly structured prize money, there's always something to play for. Hope you and your boys are well BB. Your idea sounds sensible and entertaining. But will never get passed because seemingly they need 4 bigot derbies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKennan Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 1 hour ago, lady-isobel-barnett said: More or less in agreement. There's a clear dividing line between full time and part time clubs or more correctly those clubs that have been traditionally full time and those part time over the last few decades. The first two tiers should be of such a size to accommodate all those full time clubs plus a few traditionally part time clubs. 28 clubs seems round about the correct cut off. National/Regional leagues one tier (or perhaps at two tiers) below that. Not dissimilar to the English model if you compare their League One with our premiership. I'm not suggesting for one minute that a full time club can't be relegated to the third tier. Simply they'd have to be the 27th or 28th poorest team that season to end up there. Conversely a handful of well run part time clubs could easily survive in the 2nd tier. It's funny, when the 'too many teams' klaxon goes off the spotlight falls on the smallest and the poorest teams as the problem when the elephant in the room might be the top flight. Just sayin'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West of Scotland Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 Too many professional clubs in Scottish football? I wonder who gets to decide which clubs live or die? Maybe us, because we're such bastions of sporting morality. I'm sure the economy will make that decision for a lot of clubs soon enough. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 Rather than getting rid of teams from the bottom, why not get rid of some from the top. I can think of 2 for starters. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowenBoys Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 22 minutes ago, Auld Jag said: Hope you and your boys are well BB. Your idea sounds sensible and entertaining. But will never get passed because seemingly they need 4 bigot derbies. Hi AJ. Boys are good, thanks. At their mother's. Will see them for a walk this afternoon. Hope you and Eunice are good. Yes, that's what happens when you go chasing the English TV money. The whole professional game here has to be dictated by 4 matches. What the SPFL and the OF need to see is that they are in danger of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. It's all very well while there is an appetite for 4 OF matches on TV but the very fact that they happen so often dilutes the product. They are like buses. I won't watch this one, there will be another one along in 8 weeks. It won't last. And then what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 1 hour ago, BowenBoys said: I would go for two leagues of 16. Home and away, 30 games. Cut out the stupid manufactured excitement of the split. No need for mid week games. Plenty of time for cup matches and a wee break at the start of the year. Give clubs a chance. Currently around half the clubs start the season looking over their shoulder, worried about possible relegation. They budget and play accordingly. It's all very negative. Let's have some stability. Let clubs settle and start to grow. Quality will begin to replace quantity. A league tournament for the benefit of the many rather than the two. The argument against is usually 'meaningless games'. I fail to see that any game that your team plays is meaningless and with properly structured prize money, there's always something to play for. The games will be less meaningless as with only 30 games the pack will be tighter, but also with 16 teams there is a bit more breathing room for clubs to pay a bit, and bring on youth players, instead of trying to grind out a 0-0 draw 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 27 minutes ago, West of Scotland said: Too many professional clubs in Scottish football? I wonder who gets to decide which clubs live or die? Maybe us, because we're such bastions of sporting morality. I'm sure the economy will make that decision for a lot of clubs soon enough. For our population size how many full time teams can we support ? Two leagues max.....there should be a pyramid/ regional set up below that subject to being able to be full time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 31 minutes ago, McKennan said: It's funny, when the 'too many teams' klaxon goes off the spotlight falls on the smallest and the poorest teams as the problem when the elephant in the room might be the top flight. Just sayin'. Not doubting that at all. But those smallest and poorest clubs are not going to get any bigger or richer when they have to travel the length and breadth of country not just once but twice a season to compete in ten club leagues. Less travel costs and more "derby" games would surely be welcome? Oh, and welcome back, McKennan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaggy Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 Just when you think the SPFL were bad, check out the solution for the Juniors ending the season early Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 4 minutes ago, jaggy said: Just when you think the SPFL were bad, check out the solution for the Juniors ending the season early To be fair, average point is what they used for our league. The difference is that no teams changed places as a result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 For virus nerds....Germany approves vaccine trial https://www.dw.com/en/coronavirus-latest-germany-approves-human-vaccine-trials/a-53204428 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlgarveJag Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 The reason we can't get consensus on what the leagues should look like is that we have diametrically opposed outcomes. One is the best entertainment for fans and a stable platform to develop Scottish football and footballers in the whole. Larger leagues (more stable) with minimal relegation but maximum opportunity for promotion (playoffs). The other is entirely based on greed and serving a TV contract that satisfies the expectation of people outside of Scotland but only serves to magnify the gulf between the holy twins in Scotland; and a handful of clubs clinging to their skirts hoping for crumbs. The first is all about 'sporting integrity' while the second is about supporting £380,000 salaries for blazer wearing cretans and leeches. Of course, as we've seen, the boards of Scottish football clubs are extremely short sighted so we can expect them to come up with short sighted plans that benefit them in the coming weeks and months. So I'll be very surprised if we see anything that will improve the match day experience for the majority fans in Scotland as a whole being announced by the BudgeGrey committee. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaggy Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 30 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said: To be fair, average point is what they used for our league. The difference is that no teams changed places as a result. Yes but they took into account Home and Away points per game. The other thing is Talbot had played only 16 of 30 games, so it seems crazy to call the league with a team having nearly half of their games to play Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Jag Posted April 22, 2020 Report Share Posted April 22, 2020 4 hours ago, BowenBoys said: Hi AJ. Boys are good, thanks. At their mother's. Will see them for a walk this afternoon. Hope you and Eunice are good. Yes, that's what happens when you go chasing the English TV money. The whole professional game here has to be dictated by 4 matches. What the SPFL and the OF need to see is that they are in danger of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. It's all very well while there is an appetite for 4 OF matches on TV but the very fact that they happen so often dilutes the product. They are like buses. I won't watch this one, there will be another one along in 8 weeks. It won't last. And then what? We are ok, thanks BB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.